[BeaverFever]

PluggyRug PluggyRug:

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

Not winning any converts, I see.


There's an empty rubber room with your name on it, somewhere.

What's this... another drive by pseudo comment from a current rubber room occupant.

Isn’t that what your comment is also?

[PluggyRug]

http://www.businessinsider.com/michael- ... rue-2018-1

$1:

The author of the explosive new Trump book says he can't be sure if parts of it are true

Kieran Corcoran

Jan. 5, 2018, 6:11 AM


The author of the explosive new book about Donald Trump's presidency acknowledged in an author's note that he wasn't certain all of its content was true.

Michael Wolff, the author of "Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House," included a note at the start that casts significant doubt on the reliability of the specifics contained in the rest of its pages.

Several of his sources, he says, were definitely lying to him, while some offered accounts that flatly contradicted those of others.

But some were nonetheless included in the vivid account of the West Wing's workings, in a process Wolff describes as "allowing the reader to judge" whether the sources' claims are true.

In other cases, the media columnist said, he did use his journalistic judgment and research to arrive at what he describes "a version of events I believe to be true."

Here is the relevant part of the note, from the 10th page of the book's prologue:


"Many of the accounts of what has happened in the Trump White House are in conflict with one another; many, in Trumpian fashion, are baldly untrue. These conflicts, and that looseness with the truth, if not with reality itself, are an elemental thread of the book.

"Sometimes I have let the players offer their versions, in turn allowing the reader to judge them. In other instances I have, through a consistency in the accounts and through sources I have come to trust, settled on a version of events I believe to be true."

The book itself, reviewed by Business Insider from a copy acquired prior to its Friday publication, is not always clear about what level of confidence the author has in any particular assertion.

Lengthy, private conversations are reported verbatim, as are difficult-to-ascertain details like what somebody was thinking or how the person felt.

Wolff attributes his book to "more than two hundred interviews" with people including Trump and "most members of his senior staff." According to the news website Axios, Wolff has dozens of hours of tapes to back up what he said.

Claims contained in the book have been widely reported by the media in the US and further afield.

They include assertions that Trump never wanted to be president, that all of his senior staff considered him an idiot, that he tried to lock the Secret Service out of his room, and that he ate at McDonald's to avoid being poisoned.

Business Insider rounded up some more of the most eye-catching claims in this article.

Trump, who sought to block publication of the book but was too late, tweeted Thursday that it was "full of lies, misrepresentations and sources that don't exist."

The White House press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, described the book as "complete fantasy."

Asked to rebut specific points, she said: "I'm not going to waste my time or the country's time going page by page and talking about a book that is complete fantasy and just full of tabloid gossip."

Other people mentioned in the book have also disputed claims made about them.

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who the book said warned Trump that he may be under surveillance from British spies, issued a statement describing the claim as "categorically absurd" and "simply untrue."

Anna Wintour, the longtime Vogue editor, also dismissed the claim that she lobbied Trump to be his ambassador to the UK as "laughably preposterous."

Other journalists have also urged caution. Some cited Wolff's track record — questions were raised about his 2008 book on Rupert Murdoch — and others compared his claims with their own knowledge of the Trump White House.

On Friday morning, Wolff responded to claims about the accuracy of his book in an interivew with NBC's "Today" show.

Host Savannah Guthrie asked him: "You stand by everything in the book? Nothing made up?"

He responded: "Absolutely everything in the book."

Shortly after, he expanded, saying: "I am certainly and absolutely, in every way, comfortable with everything I've reported in this book."

This isn't necessarily at odds with what he said in the author's note, as it allows for the possibility that he was told something untrue and repeated it without realising, or reached a wrong conclusion when presenting a version of contested events.

[BeaverFever]

PluggyRug PluggyRug:

http://www.businessinsider.com/michael-wolff-note-says-he-doesnt-know-if-trump-book-is-all-true-2018-1

$1:

The author of the explosive new Trump book says he can't be sure if parts of it are true

Kieran Corcoran

Jan. 5, 2018, 6:11 AM


The author of the explosive new book about Donald Trump's presidency acknowledged in an author's note that he wasn't certain all of its content was true.

Michael Wolff, the author of "Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House," included a note at the start that casts significant doubt on the reliability of the specifics contained in the rest of its pages.

Several of his sources, he says, were definitely lying to him, while some offered accounts that flatly contradicted those of others.

But some were nonetheless included in the vivid account of the West Wing's workings, in a process Wolff describes as "allowing the reader to judge" whether the sources' claims are true.

In other cases, the media columnist said, he did use his journalistic judgment and research to arrive at what he describes "a version of events I believe to be true."

Here is the relevant part of the note, from the 10th page of the book's prologue:


"Many of the accounts of what has happened in the Trump White House are in conflict with one another; many, in Trumpian fashion, are baldly untrue. These conflicts, and that looseness with the truth, if not with reality itself, are an elemental thread of the book.

"Sometimes I have let the players offer their versions, in turn allowing the reader to judge them. In other instances I have, through a consistency in the accounts and through sources I have come to trust, settled on a version of events I believe to be true."

The book itself, reviewed by Business Insider from a copy acquired prior to its Friday publication, is not always clear about what level of confidence the author has in any particular assertion.

Lengthy, private conversations are reported verbatim, as are difficult-to-ascertain details like what somebody was thinking or how the person felt.

Wolff attributes his book to "more than two hundred interviews" with people including Trump and "most members of his senior staff." According to the news website Axios, Wolff has dozens of hours of tapes to back up what he said.

Claims contained in the book have been widely reported by the media in the US and further afield.

They include assertions that Trump never wanted to be president, that all of his senior staff considered him an idiot, that he tried to lock the Secret Service out of his room, and that he ate at McDonald's to avoid being poisoned.

Business Insider rounded up some more of the most eye-catching claims in this article.

Trump, who sought to block publication of the book but was too late, tweeted Thursday that it was "full of lies, misrepresentations and sources that don't exist."

The White House press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, described the book as "complete fantasy."

Asked to rebut specific points, she said: "I'm not going to waste my time or the country's time going page by page and talking about a book that is complete fantasy and just full of tabloid gossip."

Other people mentioned in the book have also disputed claims made about them.

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who the book said warned Trump that he may be under surveillance from British spies, issued a statement describing the claim as "categorically absurd" and "simply untrue."

Anna Wintour, the longtime Vogue editor, also dismissed the claim that she lobbied Trump to be his ambassador to the UK as "laughably preposterous."

Other journalists have also urged caution. Some cited Wolff's track record — questions were raised about his 2008 book on Rupert Murdoch — and others compared his claims with their own knowledge of the Trump White House.

On Friday morning, Wolff responded to claims about the accuracy of his book in an interivew with NBC's "Today" show.

Host Savannah Guthrie asked him: "You stand by everything in the book? Nothing made up?"

He responded: "Absolutely everything in the book."

Shortly after, he expanded, saying: "I am certainly and absolutely, in every way, comfortable with everything I've reported in this book."

This isn't necessarily at odds with what he said in the author's note, as it allows for the possibility that he was told something untrue and repeated it without realising, or reached a wrong conclusion when presenting a version of contested events.

Fiddle already posted and I already provided my rebuttal.

[N_Fiddledog]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Fiddle already posted and I already provided my rebuttal.

Yeah, but it was so worthless, reposting the article makes a point.

I believe your "rebuttal" went something like:

$1:

You can say that about any book.

Now I'm not sure that's true, but I do know not every author of claimed nonfiction produces work so peppered with obvious BS that he feels obliged to admit it's BS and offer excuses for it.

You wanna talk about rebuttals, how about all the rebuttals to his BS excuse for all the BS in his pretend nonfiction.

$1:

“Allowing the reader to judge”? What is this, a Choose Your Own Adventure book?

The whole ordeal is garbage and as Professor Jacobson discussed last week, noise.

All the hot takes on why Trump’s presidency is in disarray based solely on a book the author says he can’t be sure is completely true: https://t.co/EETqXJy3KS

— Kemberlee Kaye (@KemberleeKaye) January 6, 2018

I’ll carry no water for Trump, but the constant and steady stream of garbage meant to delegitimize his presidency continues to be a pathetic and petty annoyance.

— Kemberlee Kaye (@KemberleeKaye) January 6, 2018

If Trump is as awful, unstable, and the latest buzzword of choice “unfit” for the Oval Office as we’ve been told, works of fiction “proving” such aren’t necessary. Simply getting out of the way, leaving him to his own devices, and waiting ought to be sufficient.

— Kemberlee Kaye (@KemberleeKaye) January 6, 2018

But that won’t happen. We’ll continue to be inundated with unsourced stories about Trump, most of which will be proven untrue because journalism is gasping for breath on its death bed and instead, we’re living in a garbage time where most news is speculative confirmation bias.

— Kemberlee Kaye (@KemberleeKaye) January 6, 2018

[xerxes]

All Wolff is saying (and others as well) is take what you read in the book with a grain of salt or two.

[PluggyRug]

xerxes xerxes:

All Wolff is saying (and others as well) is take what you read in the book with a grain ton of salt or two.

Fixed for accuracy.

[ShepherdsDog]

Wolff said he is only reporting what others have said. Seeing as it came from those that Trump has surrounded himself with, and who follow his lead, I guess it's a good policy to doubt their truthfulness.

[BeaverFever]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Fiddle already posted and I already provided my rebuttal.

Yeah, but it was so worthless, reposting the article makes a point.

I believe your "rebuttal" went something like:

$1:

You can say that about any book.

Now I'm not sure that's true, but I do know not every author of claimed nonfiction produces work so peppered with obvious BS that he feels obliged to admit it's BS and offer excuses for it.

You wanna talk about rebuttals, how about all the rebuttals to his BS excuse for all the BS in his pretend nonfiction.

$1:

“Allowing the reader to judge”? What is this, a Choose Your Own Adventure book?

The whole ordeal is garbage and as Professor Jacobson discussed last week, noise.

All the hot takes on why Trump’s presidency is in disarray based solely on a book the author says he can’t be sure is completely true: https://t.co/EETqXJy3KS

— Kemberlee Kaye (@KemberleeKaye) January 6, 2018

I’ll carry no water for Trump, but the constant and steady stream of garbage meant to delegitimize his presidency continues to be a pathetic and petty annoyance.

— Kemberlee Kaye (@KemberleeKaye) January 6, 2018

If Trump is as awful, unstable, and the latest buzzword of choice “unfit” for the Oval Office as we’ve been told, works of fiction “proving” such aren’t necessary. Simply getting out of the way, leaving him to his own devices, and waiting ought to be sufficient.

— Kemberlee Kaye (@KemberleeKaye) January 6, 2018

But that won’t happen. We’ll continue to be inundated with unsourced stories about Trump, most of which will be proven untrue because journalism is gasping for breath on its death bed and instead, we’re living in a garbage time where most news is speculative confirmation bias.

— Kemberlee Kaye (@KemberleeKaye) January 6, 2018

He didn’t say his book was BS. He said the Trump people he interviewed were prone to BS.


Shep summed it up succinctly. All he did is report what the Trump staffers said, and he noted that they’re known liars.

[Thanos]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Wolff said he is only reporting what others have said. Seeing as it came from those that Trump has surrounded himself with, and who follow his lead, I guess it's a good policy to doubt their truthfulness.

Except for Mattis and Kelly the best bet is to automatically assume anyone in the admin is always lying every time they say anything or issue a statement.

[Sunnyways]

What sort of person calls himself a genius? It's beyond weird.

[herbie]

$1:

If Trump is as awful, unstable, and the latest buzzword of choice “unfit” for the Oval Office as we’ve been told, works of fiction “proving” such aren’t necessary. Simply getting out of the way, leaving him to his own devices, and waiting ought to be sufficient.

— Kemberlee Kaye (@KemberleeKaye) January 6, 2018

If that had been said Jan. 6th, 2017 it wouldn't make Kemberlee look so much the last retard on Earth....

[Thanos]

herbie herbie:

$1:

If Trump is as awful, unstable, and the latest buzzword of choice “unfit” for the Oval Office as we’ve been told, works of fiction “proving” such aren’t necessary. Simply getting out of the way, leaving him to his own devices, and waiting ought to be sufficient.

— Kemberlee Kaye (@KemberleeKaye) January 6, 2018

If that had been said Jan. 6th, 2017 it wouldn't make Kemberlee look so much the last retard on Earth....

Comments like that confirm that the Bernie Bros were 100% in calling Dem/liberal centrists a pack of cowards. Leave him to his own devices? Yeah, sounds terrific to anyone as long as they're not the ones he ends up killing after some Twitter spasm of his eventually triggers a fucking war.

[DrCaleb]

Sunnyways Sunnyways:

What sort of person calls himself a genius? It's beyond weird.

The kind who have delusions of adequacy.

[herbie]

I've been called one many times during my career.
Unfortunately for me, by people like the last ones who couldn't figure out (after 3 months of them and their friends trying) you plug the blue component plug into the blue port on the tv, the red into the red port, etc.
Maybe he wants to cheapen the word genius like they've done with the word hero.

[ShepherdsDog]

I wonder if Bannon's lips are chapped and orange yet from all his ass kissing?